Chivalry has been romanticized and idealized so much that it has lost its true value. The misuse of Chivalry by men, and the abuse of Chivalry by women, are jointly contributing to the downfall of the SMP, and ultimately western society.

Targeted Readership: All

This post is the third in a series of articles discussing ethical systems, ethical considerations and their applications. This essay is comprised of six parts.

The Application of Cultural Ethics within the Sexual Market Place

Female Worthiness of Chivalry

The Motivations of Modern Chivalry

Case Study: A Black Man Hits A White Girl!

The Appropriateness of Chivalry

Conclusions

Note 1: For more definitions and descriptions of the three ethical systems, (1) Innocence/Righteousness vs. Guilt (RvG), (2) Honor vs. Shame (HvS), and (3) Power vs. Fear (PvF), please read the first installment of this series, Foundations of Cultural Ethics and Chivalry (February 18, 2018).

Note 2: The concept of Honour, as it is understood in the RvG system, pertains to an internal sense of honour, whereas, in the HvS system, honor refers to an external appearance that invites social affirmation. To differentiate between the two ethical concepts, the British spelling of honour is adopted for the former, and the American, honor, for the latter.

1. The Application of Cultural Ethics within the Sexual Market Place

Today’s women have a complex set of issues to deal with, and this is combined with their apparent lack of willingness to do emotional work, invest relationally, and delay gratification.

Because the typical woman cannot find a man who can fulfill all her needs simultaneously (which is quite a ridiculous expectation), she feels no obligation to treat any particular man with distinction, except perhaps a man who can instill the venerated Tingles, and even then, only while the predaciousness lasts.

As a result, it is quite common to see approximately 80% of women take the ‘easy way out’ by holding a considerable number of men at her rotating disposal, with each man fulfilling one or more aspects of her social, emotional, material, relational, and sexual needs.

Combine this with a deluge of Feminist mantras over the last four decades, teaching them that men are subhuman, toxic, unnecessary, and bothersome, and this has resulted in the total attrition of the Honeycraft skill among women as a whole.

Furthermore, they don’t even recognize the need to respect or honor men, and especially those ‘nice’, committed, virtuous men, who offer continual validation, support and investment to women, get stepped on with stiletto heels, and swept under the rug. Now, we have the situation where most men (about 80%) can find very little substance or benefits from their associations with women.

This witty meme, which blitzed through social media on International Women’s Day (March 8, 2018), illustrates the subtle one-sided view that women have towards modern Chivalry.

Women, of course, will emphasize that the point of the axiom is that women supply a noble purpose to men’s acts of valor, and this sparks women’s ardor because it attributes honor to women.

But the flip side implies that, without women, the brave, altruistic sacrifices of men have no meritable purpose, which is a suggestion that undermines men’s inherent need for honor, respect and dignity.

But that is the false, zero-sum message of Feminism – that women only receive honor at the expense of men’s honour. (When my wife showed me this meme with glee, I responded with raised eyebrows and an amused, but disinterested, ‘hmm…’.)

In a previous post, it was argued that Chivalry is a masculine construct. But in this post, I will show that it is not only a male construct, but also requires the proper response and participation of willing women.

Chivalry involves men acting like ‘knights in shining armor’, and this naturally involves a noble purpose, such as ‘rescuing the fair damsel’, or the like. But also, chivalry requires women to be ‘virtuous princesses’ in turn… and not just through a psychological identification to the mythical archetype, but truly virtuous ladies in waiting.

Because the social image of the ‘princess’ trope carries virtue and honor, women thus have personal agency to continue, and enhance the code of Chivalry. As such, Chivalry has become a feminine construct, but we will see that this is false as well.

Coming back to reality, we have to ask, are those 80% of females really worthy of true Chivalry?

2. Female Worthiness of Chivalry

‘Liberated’ females desire to keep Chivalry intact for the sake of the benefits that Blue Pilled white knights can bring, but at the same time, they want the option of dispensing with it when it comes to the SMP.

She expects chivalry de rigueur, in order to garner public honor, attention, affirmation and popularity within her peer group, but will readily and thoughtlessly dispense with her role of being dignified when it comes to returning the female version of Chivalry – offering respect, and various other favors to men.

She will smile and preen when she is with her man in public, but when she is alone at home with her man, she will fight, argue, shit test, and throw a tantrum whenever she doesn’t get her way. Then, when she is NOT with her man, she is flirting with beta orbiters and seeking sexual validation.

This two-facedness is not the behavior of a princess who is deserving of Chivalry.

Other Manospherians have pointed out that an ideal man, in women’s eyes, is an alpha with beta qualities. That is to say, they want a solid, masculine man who offers comfort and leisure. Among other complicating factors, it is a contradiction that most women find very frustrating. As a result, it is not uncommon to find women who distribute their time between both types of men, sometimes within open relationships.

She may want a man to carry her bags, provide a credit-card/ATM service, and maintain the security and integrity of a home. Yet, when it comes down to the actual selection of a sexual partner, most liberated women toss these qualities aside for the immediate thrills of the tingle.

This self-centered, two-timing behavior is also not becoming of a princess.

I will postulate that if a woman expects Chivalry from men, then she must necessarily fit the feminine construct of Chivalry as well. Because, you know, women want everything to be ‘fair’. But of course, the application of the ‘fair’ principle is also subject to capriciousness.

But even though men know women think this way, they still cling to the ‘nice guy’ expression of Chivalry. Why?

3. The Motivations of Modern Chivalry

Western men, especially Christian men, are ready and willing to be chivalrous, as evidenced by the sheer numbers of betaboys and white knights.

A lot of their motivation is based on what they learned from their Blue Pill social conditioning within the Matrix, and this effect has been well covered in the Manosphere. But on a larger scale, the Western edition of the Matrix is all dependent on the RvG ethics system. It is implied that as long as a guy can retain a virtuous identity, he can self-righteously profess to be one of the ‘good guys’.

Thus, many men have the Blue Pill notion that acting Chivalrous is (partly) what determines their virtue. Men continue to display ‘chivalrous’ behavior because they have compromised the tenets of true Chivalry in order to avail of an easy way to virtue signal their presupposed righteousness and valor.

But true virtue is in fact, hard won, and seldom noticed by culture, much less honored nor rewarded. So in fact, what we are seeing today is a lot of fake virtue posturing, dressed up as ‘Chivalry’.

Since they have only been exposed to a comfortable, safe, secure RvG system, they are ignorant of other ethical systems, and are thus at a disadvantage when faced with another. So, from a certain perspective, western men, not women, have been spoiled by generations of chivalry. For example, Blue Pilled White Knights think that doing something as easy and simple as holding the door for a woman makes a man almost as glorified in righteousness as Christ.

But in the Red Pill reality, we know this ‘nice guy’ attitude automatically disqualifies his SMV, and ejects him from the SMP. So the problem is not just with Feminism, or the lack of a RP education, it’s a weakness of the whole RvG system! The following case study is offered as an illustration of what I mean.

4. Case Study: A Black Man Hits A White Girl!

An enlightening story, told by Dalrock in his post, What can’t continue, won’t. (February 14, 2018), has recently caused a stir in the Manosphere. Dark Brightness offered a commentary on this story in Marriage and Puppies. (February 15, 2018).

In this story, a young woman at a party is foolishly challenging several men to strike her. It is implied that she issues this challenge as a display of her ‘power’ over men’s expression of their masculine nature, which is a Feminist claim.

“…after being refused by several white men, a moxie filled feminist was finally obliged by a black man who proceeded to (with minimal effort) knock her across the room. As expected, the complaint from the women present went immediately from taunting “you are too chicken to fight a girl”, to outrage, “you hit a girl”!”

Here in this case, the black man was acting out of his sense of personal honor and defending the foolish reproach to his masculine power. The white guys did not respond in such a way because of ‘Chivalry’. But again, this is not true Chivalry. It’s just that these guys think and live according to the Righteousness vs. Guilt (RvG) ethic.

Another thing to consider is that these men are dealing with a proud, foolish woman who does not deserve Chivalry in the first place. I say this because any woman who intentionally brings shame on innocent men without a provocation, is inherently a bad woman who should be rejected and avoided.

It is interesting to note here, that within the RvG system, the moxied feminista has the white men backed into a corner, but only because she is not faithful to the RvG tenets. Instead, she adopts a rather deceitful tactic by employing elements of the PvF ethics system, namely, the imminent threat of physical force, or in this case, the lack thereof, implying weakness and submission on the part of the men. In addition, her trick is doubly effective because it also plays into the HvS system, i.e. she shames the men when she rolls them with embarrassment.

The ‘weakness’ of the men is manifested and interpreted in situ as confusion and a shaky confidence. This is a false appearance, but it appears evident only because confidence and strength of mind are primarily expressions of virtue within the RvG system. This is the frame of mind held by the white men, so they are thereby defamed within their own frame of reference.

But if we reframe this interaction from the vixen’s point of view, who is playing by a different set of ethics (namely PvF), the only real ‘weakness’ of these young men is that they are hung up on the RvG system, and the only way they can cling to their sense of Righteousness is by eating the insult and NOT striking back. By refraining from action, the white guys can cling to their self-imposed identity of ‘righteous virtue’, and protect their associated ego investment in what they believe is ‘Chivalry’.

The frame of the black man in the story, on the other hand, was more attuned to either (or both) the Honor vs. Shame, or the Power vs. Fear ethics systems, and not so much into Righteousness as a personal ethic. (Much of Africa, and thus, black lineage in general, is submerged in a matriarchal PvF system.)

As a result, the woman’s disrespectful words are taken seriously as a shame tactic, and also a challenge to his masculine power. Within these two systems, the ‘correct’ response on the part of the black man, is to reinstate one’s honor by ‘destroying’ the one who brought him shame, and to defeat the one who challenged his power through an exercise of that power. Hence, the return blow.

It could be argued that the black guy was relatively more chivalrous than the white dudes, simply because he remained true to both his own ethical system, and the one presented to him by the woman. He also displayed a fair bit of bravery in hitting this woman, knowing that he was surrounded by white guys, and that she may very well have filed a police report of battery in response.

At the very least, she will walk away with a real life confirmation of the Feminist mantra that ‘masculinity is toxic’. What she doesn’t understand is that it’s only toxic when she is foolish enough to mock displays of Chivalry, betray the generosity of her own culture’s ethical system and insult it.

Now if those white guys had held true to their own concept of Chivalry, a brawl with the black man should have ensued after he struck the woman. But apparently, that is not part of the story.

The question is, why did those white guys fail to defend the woman after she got decked? Is it because…

They were effete wimps, who merely wanted to appear virtuous, and were not truly Chivalrous.

They knew the woman deserved it, but they wisely let the black guy do the dirty work.

After she shamed them, they presumed that she was not worth the effort. So they let things stand.

They were too afraid of the black guy.

They were too drunk, high, etc.

All of the above?

Furthermore, what would have been the best response on the part of the white guys?

I would say there is no ‘best response’ option for the white guys, because they were operating within a completely different ethical system. However, the woman and the black man interacted within the same ethical system, and were thereby able to establish what we might call a ‘significantly meaningful, non-verbal communication’.

5. The Appropriateness of Chivalry

The previous story should make it obvious that true chivalry should be denoted by brave valor from men, and that it also requires righteous gestures from females as well. Thus, it is easy to understand how women are eager to rely on, and even demand, chivalry from men, but they are too quick to defraud society out of their own contributions towards chivalry.

Going back to the true foundations of Chivalry, we can conclude that only the highest quality of women are worthy of chivalry. We’re talking nubile virgins of the royal class. No other (single) women are worthy.

One of the most noteworthy acts of faith and valor that a female can take is in retaining her virginity until marriage. But modern princesses have become spoiled brats, so too many women find this ‘requirement’ heavy and legalistic. They have been deceived.

The decay has set in because western culture has a perspicacious weakness, in that it’s people can easily believe that all of society can be royal. They love to believe the Disney tales and think that they can live that life. It’s part of the American Dream. They even believe that it is virtuous to cherish such hopes as their aspirations in life. Men also have fantasies about ‘winning the love of a princess’, and perhaps this also bolsters their false notions of righteous Chivalry.

Dalrock pointed out (in the previously cited post) how feminism depends wholly on chivalry for it’s strength. Although true, this is somewhat of a misstatement. To be more exact, this aspect of feminism depends on accessing the strengths of an ethical system (i.e. PvF) in which women have a natural intuition, and which the vast majority of men in anglo culture (RvG) are totally ignorant of, and find difficult to learn.

More to the point, women who behave as that young woman did in Dalrock’s story, are succumbing to spiritual foolishness, and are insulting God’s created order of male female relations. Scripture tells us all about such women and their male cohorts, including their nature, their characteristics, and their end.

“20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man…”

“24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.”

“26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.”

“28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.” ~ Romans 1:18-32

We know all these qualities are present in 4th Wave Intersectional Feminism, the abortion industrial complex, and the associated debasement of marriage that is widely present in society.

It all makes perfect sense now!

6. Conclusions

Western, Christian men are readily willing to be chivalrous, as evidenced by the sheer numbers of ‘nice guys’, betaboys, and white knights.

Men have the notion that acting Chivalrous is what determines their virtue. But true virtue is in fact, hard won, and seldom noticed by culture, much less honored nor rewarded.

Men continue to display chivalrous behavior because they have compromised the tenets of true Chivalry in order to avail of an easy way to virtue signal their presupposed righteousness and valor.

Since western men have only been exposed to a comfortable, safe, secure Righteousness vs. Guilt system of ethics, they are ignorant of other systems, and are thus at a disadvantage.

Feminism depends on the benefits and weaknesses inherent in the RvG system, while at the same time, betraying the RvG system by buying into the Honor vs. Shame, and the Power vs. Fear systems.

Only a fully righteous woman is worthy of chivalry.

Western women abandon all claim to any purported innocence or righteousness within the RvG system whenever they accept feminist ideologies, pursue self-ambition, indulge themselves in the benefits of hypergamy, such as the Tingles, and/or riding the carousel. As a result, they are not necessarily entitled to any displays or benefits of chivalry, because they have chosen to play by a different set of ethical rules.

Until chivalrous men realize that feminist women are not playing by the same ethical rules, they will always be duped by the power play.

Reframe this post:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion.
Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame